Airworthiness Directives; CFM International, S. A. Turbofan Engines, 45842-45845 [2013-17296]
Download as PDF
45842
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
interested persons were invited to
attend the meeting and participate in
Committee deliberations on all issues.
Like all Committee meetings, the
December 11, 2012, meeting was a
public meeting. All entities, both large
and small, were able to express views
on this issue.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the order’s information
collection requirements have been
previously approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and
assigned OMB No. 0581–0178, Generic
Vegetable Crops. No changes in those
requirements as a result of this action
are anticipated. Should any changes
become necessary, they would be
submitted to OMB for approval.
This action imposes no additional
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
on either small or large California olive
handlers. As with all Federal marketing
order programs, reports and forms are
periodically reviewed to reduce
information requirements and
duplication by industry and public
sector agencies.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this rule.
Comments on the interim rule were
required to be received on or before June
28, 2013. No comments were received.
Therefore, for the reasons given in the
interim rule, we are adopting the
interim rule as a final rule, without
change.
To view the interim rule, go to:
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docket
Detail;D=AMS-FV-12-0076.
This action also affirms information
contained in the interim rule concerning
Executive Orders 12866 and 12988, and
the E-Gov Act (44 U.S.C. 101).
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, it is found that
finalizing the interim rule, without
change, as published in the Federal
Register (78 FR 24979, April 29, 2013)
will tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Jkt 229001
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION
12 CFR Parts 1024 and 1026
[Docket No. CFPB–2013–0010]
RIN 3170–AA37
Amendments to the 2013 Mortgage
Rules Under the Real Estate
Settlement Procedure Act (Regulation
X) and the Truth in Lending Act
(Regulation Z)
Correction
In rule document 2013–16962,
appearing on pages 44686–44728 in the
issue of Wednesday, July 24, 2013, make
the following correction:
§ 1026.43 Minimum Standards for
Transactions Secured by a Dwelling
[Corrected]
On page 44727, in the third column,
on the eleventh line from the bottom,
‘‘eligibility requirements for Fannie Mae
products and loan terms’’ should read
‘‘The loan still meets eligibility
requirements for Fannie Mae products
and loan terms.’’
■
[FR Doc. C1–2013–16962 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2012–1114; Directorate
Identifier 2012–NE–21–AD; Amendment 39–
17511; AD 2013–14–06]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; CFM
International, S. A. Turbofan Engines
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
CFM International, S. A. (CFM) model
CFM56–5 and CFM56–5B series
turbofan engines. This AD was
prompted by corrosion of the delta-P
valve in the hydro-mechanical unit
(HMU) fuel control caused by exposure
to type TS–1 fuel. This AD requires
SUMMARY:
Accordingly, the interim rule
amending 7 CFR Part 932, which was
published at 78 FR 24979 on April 29,
2013, is adopted as a final rule, without
change.
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN
CALIFORNIA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
[FR Doc. 2013–18222 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
Marketing agreements, Olives,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
■
Dated: July 24, 2013.
Rex A. Barnes,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural
Marketing Service.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cleaning, inspection, and repair of
affected HMUs. We are issuing this AD
to prevent seizure of the HMU, leading
to failure of one or more engines and
damage to the airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective September 3,
2013.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of September 3, 2013.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations
office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact CFM International Inc.,
Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann
Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH
45125; International phone: 513–552–
3272; USA phone: 877–432–3272;
International fax: 513–552–3329; USA
fax: 877–432–3329; email:
geae.aoc@ge.com; or CFM International
SA, Customer Support Center,
International phone: 33 1 64 14 88 66;
fax: 33 1 64 79 85 55; email:
snecma.csc@snecma.fr. You may view
this service information at the FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call 781–
238–7125.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is
provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Martin Adler, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine
& Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone: 781–238–7157; fax: 781–238–
7199; email: martin.adler@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to the specified products. The
NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on January 14, 2013 (78 FR
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
2644). The NPRM proposed to require
cleaning, inspection, and repair of the
affected HMUs.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. The
following presents the comments
received on the proposal and the FAA’s
response to each comment.
Agreement With the Proposed AD
American Airlines supports the
NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013)
and does not foresee being impacted by
this AD now or in the future.
Request To Include Minimum
Threshold for TS–1 Fuel Usage
Seven commenters requested that the
NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) be
modified to include a minimum
threshold for TS–1 fuel usage similar to
the service bulletins (SBs). The reason
for this request is that the NPRM differs
from the service information. The data
does not support the more restrictive
applicability called for by the NPRM.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD 2012–0123, dated July 9,
2012, is less restrictive as well. There
have been no events since
implementation of the EASA AD and
since the latest versions of the CFM SBs.
Several carriers questioned whether the
data supports having no threshold and
if in-flight shutdown events truly apply
to the worldwide fleet.
We partially agree with including a
minimum usage threshold. We have no
technical objections to the usage
threshold utilized in the CFM SBs.
However, since there are no U.S.
operators using TS–1 fuel, there is no
benefit to increasing the complexity of
the AD. We did not change the AD.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Request To Reduce Applicability To
Match EASA AD
Five commenters requested that the
NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) be
modified to reduce the applicability to
match the EASA AD. The reason for this
request is that the data does not support
the more restrictive applicability called
for by the NPRM. The EASA AD
applicability is less restrictive. There
have been no events since
implementation of the EASA AD and
the latest versions of the CFM SBs.
We do not agree. No U.S. operators
use TS–1 fuel. Therefore, there is no
benefit to increasing the complexity of
the AD. We did not change the AD.
Request To Eliminate TS–1 Fuel Usage
Recording
Five air carriers requested that the
NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
modified to eliminate TS–1 fuel usage
recording. The reason for this request is
that the additional record keeping will
add cost and complexity. This will be a
burden to the operators.
We do not agree. TS–1 fuel usage
records are required for enforcement of
the AD. In addition, many operators
already track fuel usage for business
purposes. The creation and retention of
TS–1 fuel records required by this AD
is not considered an undue burden. We
did not change the AD.
Request To Delay Issuance of AD
CFM and Airbus requested that we
delay issuing the AD until mid-2013.
The reason for this request is that CFM
is conducting additional testing and
analysis to further validate the usage
threshold called out in the SBs.
We do not agree. We have no
technical objections to the usage
threshold utilized in the CFM SBs.
However, since there are no U.S.
operators using TS–1 fuel, there is no
benefit to increasing the complexity of
the AD. We did not change the AD.
Request Clarification of Differences
Between NPRM and EASA AD
Lufthansa Technik noted that there
are significant differences between the
NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013)
and the EASA AD. Lufthansa Technik
questioned whether the agencies have
differing opinions of the technical issue.
We do not agree. The technical
understanding of the issue is consistent,
but differences in procedure and policy
result in the differences between the
NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013)
and the EASA AD.
Request To Define Parameters for
Recording TS–1 Fuel Usage
Lufthansa Technik pointed out that
the specific parameters to record TS–1
fuel usage are not well defined and
asked if it is the intention to track fuel
volume or the number of fuel uploads.
The reason for this request is to clarify
units to be measured for TS–1 fuel
usage.
We do not agree. The actions are
required regardless of the amount of
TS–1 exposure. The intent is to track if
an HMU has been exposed to TS–1 fuel.
We did not change the AD.
Request To Allow Earlier Versions of
the SB To Be Used
Lufthansa Technik and Virgin
America Airlines requested that use of
earlier revisions of the SBs be allowed.
Earlier revisions of the SB allow
cleaning or replacement of the delta-P
valve. The latest revisions only allow
replacement of the delta-P valve.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45843
Cleaning has proven effective at
eliminating the issue, so replacement in
all cases is not required. Also, the
general inspection procedure has not
changed from the initial release of the
SBs to the one called out by the AD.
We agree. Cleaining of the HMU deltaP valve is effective at mitigating the risk
of this issue and should be allowed. We
changed this AD to reference the
following service information to do the
inspection: paragraph 3.A(2) of CFM SB
CFM56–5 S/B 73–0182, Revision 6,
dated March 8, 2012; or CFM SB
CFM56–5B S/B 73–0122, Revision 8,
dated March 8, 2012.
Request To Clarify Reporting
Requirements
TAP Portugal asks if the AD includes
a usage threshold calculation, would
time spent in storage be discounted
from the calculation? The reason for this
request is to seek clarification on
threshold calculation.
We do not agree. The AD does not
include a usage threshold. We did not
change the AD.
Request Change to Applicability
TAP Portugal requested that the AD
also apply to the CFM56–5C engine. The
reason for this request is that there are
many interchangable parts between
CFM56–5C and the affected engines.
We do not agree. The data received for
HMU corrosion and subsequent engine
shutdown have all come from CFM56–
5A and CFM56–5B engines, which are
used on a different family of airplanes
than CFM56–5C. At this time, there is
insufficient data to support adding the
CFM56–5C to the Applicability
paragraph. We did not change the AD.
Request Clarification for the Definition
of Overhaul
Air France requested that we clarify
the definition of overhaul. HMU
overhaul is defined in the Component
Maintenance Manual as specific
maintenance which may or may not
align with the maintenance required by
this AD. This could cause conflicts and
confusion when attempting to comply
with the AD.
We agree. The intent of the AD when
referring to overhaul is anytime the
HMU delta-P valve is inspected,
cleaned, or replaced. We added the
following defintion to the AD: ‘‘For the
purposes of this AD, overhaul is defined
as HMU maintenance, which includes
inspection, cleaning, or replacement of
the HMU delta-P valve.’’
Request Increase in Compliance Time
Rossiya Airlines requested an increase
in initial compliance time for an HMU
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
45844
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
with more than 8,000 hours to be 24
months or 4,200 hours. The utilization
rate of Rossiya Airlines is above 3,800
hours per year. The current compliance
equates to less than one year in which
to fully comply with the AD. The reason
for this request is that the number of
spare and rotable engines does not
support the compliance time rate
requirement.
We partially agree with increasing the
initial compliance time. The intent of
the initial compliance time was to allow
sufficient time for all of the high-time
impacted HMUs to be replaced. The
2,000-hour allowance did not take into
account the high-time utilization rates
of some operators. The initial inspection
compliance times are revised to allow
up to 4,000 hours from the effective date
of the AD. We disagree with increasing
the initial inspection compliance times
to 4,200 hours because that does not
mitigate the unsafe condition.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Request To Delete Initial Cleaning
Requirement
Lufthansa Technik noted that the lack
of records for prior TS–1 fuel usage will
make determination of usage extremely
difficult. In addition, this determination
will need to be made for all engines and
HMUs worldwide. The reason for this
request is that lease components, lease
engines, and component pools
transferred between operators might
have exposed an HMU to TS–1 fuel. The
exposed HMU might then get
transferred to a region where TS–1 fuel
is not used, such as the United States.
We do not agree. An initial inspection
of the HMU is required unless it can be
shown that the HMU has never been
exposed to TS–1 fuel. We did not
change the AD.
Request for Consideration of Costs to
Worldwide Fleet
Air France requested that we include
consideration for the costs to the
worldwide fleet. The NPRM (78 FR
2644, January 14, 2013) stated that there
is no impact to U.S. operators; however,
European operators would be impacted.
The reason for this request is to expand
cost considerations to include the
worldwide fleet.
We do not agree. The AD only applies
to U.S.-registered aircraft. Foreign
operators must comply with the
regulations of their local authority. The
cost considerations listed in the AD
reflect the impact to U.S. operators only.
We did not change the AD.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data,
including the comments received, and
determined that air safety and the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
public interest require adopting this AD
with the changes described previously.
We determined that these changes will
not increase the economic burden on
any operator or increase the scope of
this AD.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
Costs of Compliance
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
We estimate that this AD will not
affect any products of U.S. registry.
Based on these figures, we estimate this
AD to have no cost impact to U.S.
operators.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII:
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701:
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
Regulatory Findings
This AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska to the extent that it justifies
making a regulatory distinction, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
2013–14–06 CFM International, S. A.:
Amendment 39–17511; Docket No.
FAA–2012–1114; Directorate Identifier
2012–NE–21–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective September 3, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to CFM International S.A.
(CFM) model CFM56–5 and CFM56–5B
series turbofan engines with any of the
hydro-mechanical unit (HMU) fuel control
part numbers (P/Ns) in paragraphs (c)(1) and
(c)(2) of this AD, installed:
(1) CFM56–5: CFM P/Ns 1348M79P02;
1348M79P03; 1348M79P04; 1348M79P06;
1348M79P07; 1348M79P08; 1348M79P09;
1348M79P10; 1348M79P11; 1348M79P12;
1348M79P13; and 1348M79P14.
(2) CFM56–5B: CFM P/Ns: 1348M79P08;
1348M79P09; 1348M79P10; 1348M79P11;
1348M79P12; 1348M79P13; and
1348M79P14.
(d) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by corrosion of the
delta-P valve in the HMU fuel control caused
by exposure to type TS–1 fuel. We are issuing
this AD to prevent seizure of the HMU,
leading to failure of one or more engines, and
damage to the airplane.
(e) Compliance
Unless already done, do the following:
(f) Record Type TS–1 Fuel Usage
(1) From the effective date of this AD,
record all TS–1 fuel usage.
(2) If the HMU never uses TS–1 fuel, no
further action is required.
(g) Initial Inspection
If the HMU has operated on TS–1 fuel,
inspect the HMU for corrosion as follows:
(1) For an HMU that has operated for fewer
than 6,000 hours since new (HSN) or hours
since last overhaul, inspect the HMU before
10,000 HSN or hours since last overhaul,
whichever comes later.
(2) For an HMU that has operated for 6,000
or more HSN or hours since last overhaul,
inspect the HMU within 24 months or 4,000
hours after the effective date of this AD,
whichever comes first.
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(3) Use paragraph 3.A(2) of CFM Service
Bulletin (SB) No. CFM56–5 S/B 73–0182,
Revision 6, dated March 8, 2012, or CFM SB
No. CFM56–5B S/B 73–0122, Revision 8,
dated March 8, 2012, to do the inspection.
(h) Repetitive Inspections
Repeat the inspection required in
paragraph (g)(3) of this AD before 10,000
hours since last overhaul if, after last
overhaul, the HMU is exposed to TS–1 fuel.
(i) Credit for Previous Actions
If the HMU has not been exposed to TS–
1 fuel since the last overhaul, then the initial
inspection in paragraph (g) of this AD is not
required.
(j) Definitions
For the purposes of this AD, overhaul is
defined as HMU maintenance, which
includes inspection, cleaning, or replacement
of the HMU delta-P valve.
(k) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden
Statement
A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, nor shall a person be subject to
a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this
information collection is 2120–0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per
response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to
this collection of information are mandatory.
Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the
burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800
Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC
20591, Attn: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, AES–200.
(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
The Manager, Engine Certification Office,
may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make
your request.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
(m) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Martin Adler, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803;
phone: 781–238–7157; fax: 781–238–7199;
email: martin.adler@faa.gov.
(2) Refer to European Aviation Safety
Agency, AD 2012–0123, dated July 9, 2012,
for more information. You may examine this
AD on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) CFM International, S. A. (CFM) Service
Bulletin No. CFM56–5 S/B 73–0182, Revision
6, dated March 8, 2012.
(ii) CFM Service Bulletin No. CFM56–5B
S/B 73–0122, Revision 8, dated March 8,
2012.
(3) For CFM International, S. A. service
information identified in this AD, contact
CFM International Inc., Aviation Operations
Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285,
Cincinnati, OH 45125; International phone:
513–552–3272; USA phone: 877–432–3272;
International fax: 513–552–3329; USA fax:
877–432–3329; email: geae.aoc@ge.com; or
CFM International SA, Customer Support
Center, International phone: 33 1 64 14 88 66;
International fax: 33 1 64 79 85 55; email:
snecma.csc@snecma.fr.
(4) You may view this service information
at FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
(5) You may view this service information
at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
July 9, 2013.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–17296 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2013–0639; Directorate
Identifier 2013–SW–020–AD; Amendment
39–17518; AD 2013–15–02]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Bell
Helicopter Textron Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule, request for
comments.
AGENCY:
We are superseding
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008–10–
03 for Bell Helicopter Textron
Helicopters (Bell) Model 204B, 205A,
205A–1, 205B, 210, 212, 412, 412CF,
and 412EP helicopters. AD 2008–10–03
required certain checks and inspections
of each tail rotor blade assembly (T/R
blade) at specified intervals and
repairing or replacing, as applicable,
any cracked or damaged T/R blade.
Since we issued AD 2008–10–03, an
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45845
accident attributed to a T/R failure
occurred. This new AD retains the
requirements of AD 2008–10–03 and
adds a second, more detailed inspection
that allows for an earlier detection of a
crack or other damage in a T/R blade.
These actions are intended to prevent a
failure of the T/R blade and subsequent
loss of helicopter control.
DATES: This AD becomes effective
August 14, 2013.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain documents listed in this AD
as of August 14, 2013.
We must receive comments on this
AD by September 30, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Send comments to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the
‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the
Docket Operations Office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this AD, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations Office (telephone
800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact Bell Helicopter
Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth,
TX 76101; telephone (817) 280–3391;
fax (817) 280–6466; or at
www.bellcustomer.com/. You may
review service information at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas
76137.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Kohner, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office,
Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas
76137; telephone (817) 222–5170; email
7-AVS-ASW-170@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45842-45845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17296]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2012-1114; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-21-AD;
Amendment 39-17511; AD 2013-14-06]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; CFM International, S. A. Turbofan
Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
CFM International, S. A. (CFM) model CFM56-5 and CFM56-5B series
turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by corrosion of the delta-P
valve in the hydro-mechanical unit (HMU) fuel control caused by
exposure to type TS-1 fuel. This AD requires cleaning, inspection, and
repair of affected HMUs. We are issuing this AD to prevent seizure of
the HMU, leading to failure of one or more engines and damage to the
airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective September 3, 2013.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 3,
2013.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.
For service information identified in this AD, contact CFM
International Inc., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room
285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; International phone: 513-552-3272; USA
phone: 877-432-3272; International fax: 513-552-3329; USA fax: 877-432-
3329; email: geae.aoc@ge.com; or CFM International SA, Customer Support
Center, International phone: 33 1 64 14 88 66; fax: 33 1 64 79 85 55;
email: snecma.csc@snecma.fr. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call 781-238-7125.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is provided in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martin Adler, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7157;
fax: 781-238-7199; email: martin.adler@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2013 (78
FR
[[Page 45843]]
2644). The NPRM proposed to require cleaning, inspection, and repair of
the affected HMUs.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and the FAA's response to each comment.
Agreement With the Proposed AD
American Airlines supports the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013)
and does not foresee being impacted by this AD now or in the future.
Request To Include Minimum Threshold for TS-1 Fuel Usage
Seven commenters requested that the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14,
2013) be modified to include a minimum threshold for TS-1 fuel usage
similar to the service bulletins (SBs). The reason for this request is
that the NPRM differs from the service information. The data does not
support the more restrictive applicability called for by the NPRM. The
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2012-0123, dated July 9,
2012, is less restrictive as well. There have been no events since
implementation of the EASA AD and since the latest versions of the CFM
SBs. Several carriers questioned whether the data supports having no
threshold and if in-flight shutdown events truly apply to the worldwide
fleet.
We partially agree with including a minimum usage threshold. We
have no technical objections to the usage threshold utilized in the CFM
SBs. However, since there are no U.S. operators using TS-1 fuel, there
is no benefit to increasing the complexity of the AD. We did not change
the AD.
Request To Reduce Applicability To Match EASA AD
Five commenters requested that the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14,
2013) be modified to reduce the applicability to match the EASA AD. The
reason for this request is that the data does not support the more
restrictive applicability called for by the NPRM. The EASA AD
applicability is less restrictive. There have been no events since
implementation of the EASA AD and the latest versions of the CFM SBs.
We do not agree. No U.S. operators use TS-1 fuel. Therefore, there
is no benefit to increasing the complexity of the AD. We did not change
the AD.
Request To Eliminate TS-1 Fuel Usage Recording
Five air carriers requested that the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14,
2013) be modified to eliminate TS-1 fuel usage recording. The reason
for this request is that the additional record keeping will add cost
and complexity. This will be a burden to the operators.
We do not agree. TS-1 fuel usage records are required for
enforcement of the AD. In addition, many operators already track fuel
usage for business purposes. The creation and retention of TS-1 fuel
records required by this AD is not considered an undue burden. We did
not change the AD.
Request To Delay Issuance of AD
CFM and Airbus requested that we delay issuing the AD until mid-
2013. The reason for this request is that CFM is conducting additional
testing and analysis to further validate the usage threshold called out
in the SBs.
We do not agree. We have no technical objections to the usage
threshold utilized in the CFM SBs. However, since there are no U.S.
operators using TS-1 fuel, there is no benefit to increasing the
complexity of the AD. We did not change the AD.
Request Clarification of Differences Between NPRM and EASA AD
Lufthansa Technik noted that there are significant differences
between the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) and the EASA AD.
Lufthansa Technik questioned whether the agencies have differing
opinions of the technical issue.
We do not agree. The technical understanding of the issue is
consistent, but differences in procedure and policy result in the
differences between the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) and the
EASA AD.
Request To Define Parameters for Recording TS-1 Fuel Usage
Lufthansa Technik pointed out that the specific parameters to
record TS-1 fuel usage are not well defined and asked if it is the
intention to track fuel volume or the number of fuel uploads. The
reason for this request is to clarify units to be measured for TS-1
fuel usage.
We do not agree. The actions are required regardless of the amount
of TS-1 exposure. The intent is to track if an HMU has been exposed to
TS-1 fuel. We did not change the AD.
Request To Allow Earlier Versions of the SB To Be Used
Lufthansa Technik and Virgin America Airlines requested that use of
earlier revisions of the SBs be allowed. Earlier revisions of the SB
allow cleaning or replacement of the delta-P valve. The latest
revisions only allow replacement of the delta-P valve. Cleaning has
proven effective at eliminating the issue, so replacement in all cases
is not required. Also, the general inspection procedure has not changed
from the initial release of the SBs to the one called out by the AD.
We agree. Cleaining of the HMU delta-P valve is effective at
mitigating the risk of this issue and should be allowed. We changed
this AD to reference the following service information to do the
inspection: paragraph 3.A(2) of CFM SB CFM56-5 S/B 73-0182, Revision 6,
dated March 8, 2012; or CFM SB CFM56-5B S/B 73-0122, Revision 8, dated
March 8, 2012.
Request To Clarify Reporting Requirements
TAP Portugal asks if the AD includes a usage threshold calculation,
would time spent in storage be discounted from the calculation? The
reason for this request is to seek clarification on threshold
calculation.
We do not agree. The AD does not include a usage threshold. We did
not change the AD.
Request Change to Applicability
TAP Portugal requested that the AD also apply to the CFM56-5C
engine. The reason for this request is that there are many
interchangable parts between CFM56-5C and the affected engines.
We do not agree. The data received for HMU corrosion and subsequent
engine shutdown have all come from CFM56-5A and CFM56-5B engines, which
are used on a different family of airplanes than CFM56-5C. At this
time, there is insufficient data to support adding the CFM56-5C to the
Applicability paragraph. We did not change the AD.
Request Clarification for the Definition of Overhaul
Air France requested that we clarify the definition of overhaul.
HMU overhaul is defined in the Component Maintenance Manual as specific
maintenance which may or may not align with the maintenance required by
this AD. This could cause conflicts and confusion when attempting to
comply with the AD.
We agree. The intent of the AD when referring to overhaul is
anytime the HMU delta-P valve is inspected, cleaned, or replaced. We
added the following defintion to the AD: ``For the purposes of this AD,
overhaul is defined as HMU maintenance, which includes inspection,
cleaning, or replacement of the HMU delta-P valve.''
Request Increase in Compliance Time
Rossiya Airlines requested an increase in initial compliance time
for an HMU
[[Page 45844]]
with more than 8,000 hours to be 24 months or 4,200 hours. The
utilization rate of Rossiya Airlines is above 3,800 hours per year. The
current compliance equates to less than one year in which to fully
comply with the AD. The reason for this request is that the number of
spare and rotable engines does not support the compliance time rate
requirement.
We partially agree with increasing the initial compliance time. The
intent of the initial compliance time was to allow sufficient time for
all of the high-time impacted HMUs to be replaced. The 2,000-hour
allowance did not take into account the high-time utilization rates of
some operators. The initial inspection compliance times are revised to
allow up to 4,000 hours from the effective date of the AD. We disagree
with increasing the initial inspection compliance times to 4,200 hours
because that does not mitigate the unsafe condition.
Request To Delete Initial Cleaning Requirement
Lufthansa Technik noted that the lack of records for prior TS-1
fuel usage will make determination of usage extremely difficult. In
addition, this determination will need to be made for all engines and
HMUs worldwide. The reason for this request is that lease components,
lease engines, and component pools transferred between operators might
have exposed an HMU to TS-1 fuel. The exposed HMU might then get
transferred to a region where TS-1 fuel is not used, such as the United
States.
We do not agree. An initial inspection of the HMU is required
unless it can be shown that the HMU has never been exposed to TS-1
fuel. We did not change the AD.
Request for Consideration of Costs to Worldwide Fleet
Air France requested that we include consideration for the costs to
the worldwide fleet. The NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) stated
that there is no impact to U.S. operators; however, European operators
would be impacted. The reason for this request is to expand cost
considerations to include the worldwide fleet.
We do not agree. The AD only applies to U.S.-registered aircraft.
Foreign operators must comply with the regulations of their local
authority. The cost considerations listed in the AD reflect the impact
to U.S. operators only. We did not change the AD.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of this AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD will not affect any products of U.S.
registry. Based on these figures, we estimate this AD to have no cost
impact to U.S. operators.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
(4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2013-14-06 CFM International, S. A.: Amendment 39-17511; Docket No.
FAA-2012-1114; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-21-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective September 3, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to CFM International S.A. (CFM) model CFM56-5
and CFM56-5B series turbofan engines with any of the hydro-
mechanical unit (HMU) fuel control part numbers (P/Ns) in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, installed:
(1) CFM56-5: CFM P/Ns 1348M79P02; 1348M79P03; 1348M79P04;
1348M79P06; 1348M79P07; 1348M79P08; 1348M79P09; 1348M79P10;
1348M79P11; 1348M79P12; 1348M79P13; and 1348M79P14.
(2) CFM56-5B: CFM P/Ns: 1348M79P08; 1348M79P09; 1348M79P10;
1348M79P11; 1348M79P12; 1348M79P13; and 1348M79P14.
(d) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by corrosion of the delta-P valve in the
HMU fuel control caused by exposure to type TS-1 fuel. We are
issuing this AD to prevent seizure of the HMU, leading to failure of
one or more engines, and damage to the airplane.
(e) Compliance
Unless already done, do the following:
(f) Record Type TS-1 Fuel Usage
(1) From the effective date of this AD, record all TS-1 fuel
usage.
(2) If the HMU never uses TS-1 fuel, no further action is
required.
(g) Initial Inspection
If the HMU has operated on TS-1 fuel, inspect the HMU for
corrosion as follows:
(1) For an HMU that has operated for fewer than 6,000 hours
since new (HSN) or hours since last overhaul, inspect the HMU before
10,000 HSN or hours since last overhaul, whichever comes later.
(2) For an HMU that has operated for 6,000 or more HSN or hours
since last overhaul, inspect the HMU within 24 months or 4,000 hours
after the effective date of this AD, whichever comes first.
[[Page 45845]]
(3) Use paragraph 3.A(2) of CFM Service Bulletin (SB) No. CFM56-
5 S/B 73-0182, Revision 6, dated March 8, 2012, or CFM SB No. CFM56-
5B S/B 73-0122, Revision 8, dated March 8, 2012, to do the
inspection.
(h) Repetitive Inspections
Repeat the inspection required in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD
before 10,000 hours since last overhaul if, after last overhaul, the
HMU is exposed to TS-1 fuel.
(i) Credit for Previous Actions
If the HMU has not been exposed to TS-1 fuel since the last
overhaul, then the initial inspection in paragraph (g) of this AD is
not required.
(j) Definitions
For the purposes of this AD, overhaul is defined as HMU
maintenance, which includes inspection, cleaning, or replacement of
the HMU delta-P valve.
(k) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to
the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.
(m) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Martin Adler,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: 781-238-7157; fax: 781-238-7199; email:
martin.adler@faa.gov.
(2) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency, AD 2012-0123,
dated July 9, 2012, for more information. You may examine this AD on
the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) CFM International, S. A. (CFM) Service Bulletin No. CFM56-5
S/B 73-0182, Revision 6, dated March 8, 2012.
(ii) CFM Service Bulletin No. CFM56-5B S/B 73-0122, Revision 8,
dated March 8, 2012.
(3) For CFM International, S. A. service information identified
in this AD, contact CFM International Inc., Aviation Operations
Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125;
International phone: 513-552-3272; USA phone: 877-432-3272;
International fax: 513-552-3329; USA fax: 877-432-3329; email:
geae.aoc@ge.com; or CFM International SA, Customer Support Center,
International phone: 33 1 64 14 88 66; International fax: 33 1 64 79
85 55; email: snecma.csc@snecma.fr.
(4) You may view this service information at FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call 781-238-7125.
(5) You may view this service information at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on July 9, 2013.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-17296 Filed 7-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P